Both the osnews article and the blog post state this. But they also state that the Metro mode is a work in progress and that they know that the UI must be improved.Fri, 08 Jun 2012 05:12:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (pgeorgi)CommentsMicrosoft playing the antitrust card again?http://www.osnews.com/thread?521338
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521338I just learned form this post that Microsoft has is blocking any browser except IE to run on Windows RT? What gives? Is that even legal?Fri, 08 Jun 2012 07:09:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (jxiz)CommentsRE: Microsoft playing the antitrust card again?http://www.osnews.com/thread?521339
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521339Yes, why not? At least they don't do it in a direct way like apple does.

They have some restrictions on desktop, where they have monopoly, but on tablets they are free to do it.

Plus, MS does not prohibit it directly, they prohibit the use of some API that would make impossible for browsers to run JS at decent speed.Fri, 08 Jun 2012 07:37:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (dragos.pop)CommentsComment by Gone fishinghttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521341
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521341Sorry to be off topic but I've been wondering why?

Why would MS abandon Aqua and impose Metro, when it must be obvious by now that it's not liked, and wont be adopted by business, reviews of it as a desktop UI are poor. OK some reviews of it as a touch screen interface are fair, but for years and possible always most users will not be using touch screen interfaces â" I don't wont one on my desktop, I don't wont a permanently dirty screen, plus reaching the screen is more awkward than using a mouse.

So why? I think the answer is MS's old and successful strategy of using one monopoly to support or create another, such as Windows and Office. MS has a near monopoly as a desktop OS it has a chance if it acts quickly of using this as leverage to become dominant in the mobile space. I'm sure the ideas is to impose Metro on users who have (or at least think they have) little choice of a desktop OS. The users will then become used to Metro and so when they move into the mobile space they buy a Windows device as they are already familiar with metro and do not need to become familiar with another system. This could be very effective with many groups of reluctant technology users and if Windows apps are ported across to the mobile space more advanced Windows users.

I suppose trying to stop other browsers using Windows 8 is something MS couldn't resist, obviously loosing the IE monopoly still smarts.Fri, 08 Jun 2012 07:50:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (Gone fishing)CommentsRE: The design looks like a ported desktop browserhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521344
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521344I am sure that Google has the know-how and will to fix this intoa more suitable form before it is released. This does however also illustrate exactly what would have happened if Microsoft had opened the win32 "hole" that browsers are allowed for everyone. We would end up with a bunch of legacy apps hastily recompiled, with little thought given to the needs of the new platform and interaction-mode. It is really significantly harder to make a sane touch app if you get to start out worth an already complete classic app and then just try to patch it. Microsoft themselves learned as much from the failed attempts at making XP/Vista/7 touch-enabled.Fri, 08 Jun 2012 08:50:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (vaette)CommentsRE: Comment by Gone fishinghttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521346
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521346With Windows 8 you're going to have to use the start screen. There is no getting around it. Its there, no option to turn it off. Its the placeholder for all things Metro.
Microsoft is taking a big gamble with Metro, not because it feels like it, but because it has to.

The world is moving increasingly to handheld devices such as mobile phones, tablets for day to day tasks. Basic internet browsing or rather social media, and dirt cheap gaming on the go is quickly eating away at its market and they have nothing to show for it apart from aFri, 08 Jun 2012 09:55:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (sagum)CommentsRE[2]: Comment by Gone fishinghttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521350
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521350

It has to be enforced, it has to be the same across the platforms. Its why we're forced to use the start screen.

I don't see how you can reach this conclusion based on anything you said. I don't see how anyone can reach this conclusion at all.

Apple is the one making the most from mobile devices and they don't enforce a single interface. Google is making pennies from Android and yet Microsoft is going to risk losing billions from enterprise just so they can have a single interface? Does anyone actually think they can make up those losses?

This is as dumb as an idea as waffle house sticking thai food in its waffles just because it is popular. You're not going to get an increase in sales from all the people who eat thai food, you're going to lose a massive amount of sales from people who buy your waffles.

This plan will fail and people will keep buying iPads.Fri, 08 Jun 2012 11:58:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (nt_jerkface)CommentsRE: The design looks like a ported desktop browserhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521378
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521378Hopefully that's not the final UI.Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:12:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (MollyC)CommentsRE: Comment by Gone fishinghttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521379
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521379I think you mean "Aero" rather than "Aqua" ("Aqua" is the UI of OSX 10.0 (I don't know if Apple still uses the term "Aqua" today)).

As for "business" won't adopt Metro thing, so what? Business will be in Windows 7 for years to come anyway. And Windows 8 has the desktop environment too. As well as command line UI.Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:15:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (MollyC)CommentsRE[2]: Comment by Gone fishinghttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521385
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521385[q]I think you mean "Aero" rather than "Aqua" ("Aqua" is the UI of OSX 10.0 (I don't know if Apple still uses the term "Aqua" today)).

Have you actually used an Xbox since they went Metro? The UI works horribly. I think the only people it's even tolerable for are the people with Kinect, and that's mostly because of the voice commands.

With the Metro UI, most actions take 5+ button presses, with many over a dozen. Finding a game in your collection is brutally slow. You get a list that displays about half a dozen games at a time, with a slow scroll between screens. The images are dynamically loaded as you go, with each taking several seconds to appear.

The UI is also a horrible waste of screen space. Picture your screen divided into 9 portions, like a Tic-Tac-Toe board. It's basically only using the center square, with the rest going to waste. What is there is a mess of randomly sized & arranged boxes, typically giving you about 5 choices per screen, requiring a very deeply nested menu structure.Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:21:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (edwdig)CommentsHow to convert usershttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521417
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521417you'll be able to try Chrome in Metro mode in the next Chrome Dev channel release by setting it as your default browser.

Thanks Windows 8/Metro! (thanks Google as well for jumping on the opportunity!)Sat, 09 Jun 2012 02:31:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (_xmv)CommentsRE[2]: Comment by Gone fishinghttp://www.osnews.com/thread?521429
http://www.osnews.com/thread?521429I don't disagree with you, other than I don't think the desktop or large laptop is going away people will have this and a mobile device.

The point I was making is that Metro is needed on the Desktop to facilitate MS in the mobile space - this you seem to agree with. I'm going a little further and saying metro is being pushed onto desktop users even though it seems that it will not be ideal in order to give MS leverage in the mobile space, i.e MS is using its dominance as a desktop OS to promote its mobile products.

(and MS might be trying with Metro something I suspect in the three posts at the bottom of http://www.osnews.com/comments/26042 )Fri, 15 Jun 2012 13:31:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (zima)CommentsRE: Comment by Gone fishinghttp://www.osnews.com/thread?522221
http://www.osnews.com/thread?522221

Metro, when it must be obvious by now that it's not liked, and wont be adopted by business, reviews of it as a desktop UI are poor

* Yes, just like it was obvious about the desktop GUI 2+ decades ago, to all those people using text user interfaces...
(and my the three posts at the bottom of http://www.osnews.com/comments/26042 )

MS's old and successful strategy of using one monopoly to support or create another, such as Windows and Office

When Windows picked up steam, with 3.x, there was really no alternative - Macs were too limited and expensive, RISC OS machines similar, Amigas even more limited & from a stumbling company & their "productive" side never really managed to capture people's attention, Atari TOS, GEOS, or GEM even more so & with hardy any 3rd party software support, OS/2 too demanding on hardware and with the underlying goal of returning to IBM the control over PC market (duh, of course numerous clone makers didn't go for it), NeXT self-exiled into the "premium" market & not yet ported to PCs, as BeOS will do half a decade later (way too late), Linux in its cradle and overall DEs for X not viable for general consumption (some might argue they aren't quite there yet)

Windows was simply by far the most sensible choice.

Oh, and Office? Yes, that relative newcomer which took over when established players (Wordperfect for example) completely dismissed and ignored the GUI (the * at the start)

BTW, that IE monopoly was also a result of it being the better browser, during the wars of late 90s. Later on, it just had the unfortunate "luck" of living too long...Edited 2012-06-15 14:42 UTCFri, 15 Jun 2012 14:38:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (zima)CommentsRE[3]: The design looks like a ported desktop browserhttp://www.osnews.com/thread?522227
http://www.osnews.com/thread?522227I'm guessing it's called Chrome Dev channel, not a release, for a reason...Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:56:00 GMTdonotreply@osnews.com (zima)Comments